Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Top progressive reform groups merge to create a $50 million operation

Jason Kander

After losing a Senate race in Missouri, Jason Kander formed Let America Vote. His group is now being absorbed by End Citizens United.

Whitney Curtis/Getty Images

Two of the more influential left-leaning democracy reform organizations are combining forces, forming one of the best-funded political operations aiming to help Democrats committed to voting rights and reducing money's sway over politics.

The merger was announced Thursday by End Citizens United, which will essentially be absorbing Let America Vote.

Since its creation five years ago, End Citizens United has become one of the more aggressive advocates for intensifying campaign finance regulations and promoting congressional and presidential candidates who make a version of "fighting the rigged system" a major campaign cause.


Let America Vote was created in 2017, with the main goal of combating voter suppression, by Jason Kander, a former Missouri secretary of state who has just lost an unexpectedly close Senate challenge to Republican incumbent Roy Blount.

He will not have a formal position in the combined operation, and his organization's super PAC is being shuttered. The combined operation will use both organization names for different purposes and will be run by Tiffany Muller, president of ECU, named for the Supreme Court rulinga decade ago that spawned a surge in unregulated and secretive campaign spending.

"Our groups' missions are intrinsically linked, and our solution must be linked as well," she said in a statement. "We look forward to combining our resources to help elect more reformers and protect the right to vote."

The combination will yield a campaign budget of $50 million this year.

ECU was one of the biggest outside groups spending to shape the 2018 midterm elections, raising $44 million to spend on behalf of its endorsed candidates for Congress and a handful of ballot initiatives. It claims 4 million members and 600,000 small-dollar donors. LAV's strength has been more in its grassroots organizing operation, which in the last election included more than 1,000 canvassers hoping to turn out the vote and promote progressive candidates.

After the acquisition, the group plans to intensify operations in three states — Arizona, North Carolina, and New Hampshire — that have gone purple in the presidential election and also have competitive Senate and House races on tap.

Read More

U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less
An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less